Just posted: Our in-depth review of the Olympus E-P3

Just Posted: Although it retains its predecessor's styling, the Olympus PEN E-P3 shares very little else with its forebears. There's still a 12MP Four Thirds-sized sensor at its heart, but its autofocus, rear screen and movie capabilities have all been radically overhauled. Crucially, Olympus has also managed to squeeze a flash into the body. Now sitting at the top of a three-model range, the E-P3 is clearly positioned as a camera for enthusiasts. So, do its third-generation refinements and promises of world-beating AF performance make the E-P3 into the camera that the PEN series always promised to be?

Comments

@PhoqueI am looking at the whole sensor technology as a package here, the vast improvements in AF alone is a major success for the sensor technology and the system itself. This is not a minor-modification as what you mentioned ealier. These obvious improvements is not just in a marketing sense because it clearly performs in the actual and practical use.

It's a new sensor, how can they achieve fastest autofocus if this is an ageing sensor, how can they achieved improved image quality compared to older models, how can they achieve better video compare to older models? etc etc. I don't get why dpreview tag them as ageing sensor.

Lovely camera - just like the '1 - but this time fast and you can have a viewfinder. No one really needs more than 12MP, it handles beautifully, is well built and now has a great range of lenses. Got mine today - can't wait to really try it out.

The sensor being 12mp is one of the reasons I chose this camera. JPEG output is another. I have tried Panasonic, and one thing you learn quickly about them is that you must shoot RAW. I have a DSLR for that. I wanted something smaller with good JPEG output, good controls, mostly for computer viewing and small prints, and the E-P3 fills the bill.Shooting in color it is very good up to about ISO 1250. If you like B&W film (and I do) the E-P3 is great up to 6400.The DPR review is right on about functionality and speed. The camera handles really well.I disagree about the menu system, "kinda". It is sort of a mess at first, but you will quickly get a grip on it and forget about it.I disagree with DPR on one thing about the sensor - pixel count. Why in the world use more than 12mp for this sensor and camera (another reason I didn't buy the Panasonic). I wish they had reduced it to 10mp.The DPR overall score looks right to me. It is a very good camera.

I wonder.............is the new ear we're in , or is the ever progressing speed in which we live? Who cared about 3200 and 6400 ISO when there was no stabilizing system, no specific need for 3200 or 6400 ISO shots??? You had your flash, you just took the picture and that was it! I wonder how many people buy a camera because the ISO performance is not coping with " the present demands?" How many really buy a camera for the fact that they have at least the reassurance that they can take a shot in a dark cave without having to use the flash? It's the image quality in general that does it ! And in that case the E-P3 review deserves nothing else but pure GOLD !

Low light performance is one area where digital cameras--at least those with large sensors--beat film, hands down. The problem for me is that these small cameras, while not bad are not in a league with a full-sized sensor camera. In the ancient days of film there were small cameras like the Ricoh GR1 and Nikon 28Ti that gave the same quality as the biggest 35mm cameras. In other words, you didn't give up any quality in exchange for the small size.

Quite true, buying a new $5000 full frame DSLR with equially priced lenses will give you better low light pictures than this (or any other $1000 DSLR for that matter) and much better than in the film days... I just wonder how big the market for huge expensive cameras for cave divers are? :)

In your test, you write that the camera doresn't offer live view when using the C-AF mode. After having talked to several people who own the E-P3 (inter alia Reinhard Wagner who writes the E-system and PEN books for Olympus Germany and knows his cameras very well), I must say that you got this wrong. You have to switch off the picture rendition and the camera display/view finder provides live view pictures in the C-AF mode.

DPReview would benefit from consulting with a competent design company, rather than seemingly deciding everything for themselves and employing developers to make it happen. Unless a competitor arrives on the scene with a better-designed site, this is unlikely to happen unfortunately. For example any competent designer would avoid pure white text on a pure black background for legibility reasons, but DPreview are blind to such matters.

Simon,Glad to hear that you're trying but above all else please give us the option to reverse the test to black on white.I think this is a great site and have been following it for many years but the white on black text is a real pain, especially those of us who have any degree of astigmatism. Even with my best glasses on the text is still not that easy to read.Come on, time to get with the plan as this has been requested by many readers over the years and surely can't be that hard to implement.

The number of high ISO shots in the new samples gallery are only doing the E-P3 a disservice and not only that they are just bad photographs, for example, P8071361 (ISO4000) and PEN00093 (ISO6400). The other sample galleries are so much better that I am surprised some of these have been allowed to see the light of day - no pun intended.

The AF improvements are going to be of little or no value in real world situations. One still has to select the point of focus, only now with a finger, and then reframe the shot which is not going to be practical for photographing anything that moves.

Both an optical viewfinder and a separate focus point selector button is needed to make this type of camera truly practical for shooting moving subjects. For now a small DSLR is far superior in these two aspects and are likely to remain so for the foreseeable future.

how on eart did you work that out???in 5 years and over 300,00 photos taken with micro four thirds and four thirds cameras I have NEVER reframed a shot and only crop a couple of photos in post a year.Unlike Nikon camera users we can auto focus or manual focus anywhere on the screen and have sharpness across the final image...

I will be stepping up from, hmm hmm, a 10 years old 3Mp Canon SD200 to this already ordered E-P3 that I'm waiting for.

Like the review said, the missing G3 sensor is a disappointment, but I only look at pictures on my monitor, so worst case 12MP @ ISO3200 displayed @ 1680x1050 should look plenty good enough.

I'm a biker and chose that camera for portability and flexibility reasons (ILS, many manual controls ), not for best possible value. I haven't hold it yet, yet I'm already satisfied from reading this review.

Oly marketing is fumbling away with micro 4/3 just as bad as 4/3rds.Panasonic on the other hand seems to do it right.I miss the Oly JPEG's from my ebayed E's(510,520,620,30), but I'm glad to be using a real DSLRHow many times can Oly release the same old EP1 pig is a new dress and call it lady....yawwwwn.

Well, if the EPs became the Avalon, if not the Lexus, of the camera world, that would not be so bad.

Radical makeovers don't tend to sell well in the auto or camera worlds. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," is sometimes a good approach. Nissan engines evolve ever so slowly. What makes a 2008 sensor "obsolete." Are you wishing for more megapixels?

Despite the 12mp aging sensor, the PEN series produces some of the most loveliest jpegs right out of the camera in the 100-400 ISO range. It has a pleasing grain-like structure to the noise at higher ISOs if the NR is turned off.Unfortunately the samples for this model don't do it much justice as they did too many high ISO shots and art effect shots. Check the older model samples to see what I mean.

The E-P3 adds video controls that earlier models lacked. But it's curious that Olympus did not throw in a few things that would add little to cost, such as wind-cut, simple mic jack, or little wind muff. The review here does not address rolling shutter or low light performance, which a camcorderinfo review suggests are E-P3 drawbacks. It would have been interesting to see the E-P3 video's compared to the G3 or (next week) NEX-7.

This is probably an OK camera for a still photographer who does not already own a similar device. But the person waiting for the ideal all-in-one that does not break the budget might prefer to wait a bit longer. Patience does reward, so long as improvements continue and price competition remains keen.

Video is a tricky thing. Some don't want it at all, while others expect features or controls that repell videophobes, or that others don't care to pay for or (groan) learn to use. Manual exposure or focus control are no friends if you can't control a scene and get only one chance to shoot. "Cut, cut cut!" or "Let's repeat that again," aren't always options.

Upgraded from the EP1 to EP3. To me, the EP3 offers enough novelties. The exposure control has been improved considerably. The sensor also seems to work better. I use Léxar SDXC cards, the camera is definitely faster than the EP1. The wireless flash control is fantastic (Panasonic at a loss here). I keep using old FT lenses

The answer to your question is nooo! You can't compare digital with film, sense it is a different workflow and wherey personal! Just to mention, if you would compare ADOX 25 T-pan in digital terms it would have a resolution of 500MP!

Hi, thanks for the review - I am a fan of Pen cameras - I already have an E-P1 and E-PL1 and am likely to replace both with one of these. I also own a NEX5 which I think is great - but for the mistake of trying to make a small camera system with a large sensor - the lenses are too big. So will sell that as well.

I see you have a page for the Art Filters - and was disappointed that there was actually no mention of them on the page - is there something missing?

When you sell such cameras, what negative margin do you typically incur? You must sell at a discount and there is a shipping fee. Does the incremental advantage of the new model compensate all that? A trade-up from P&S to larger sensor models I can understand, but incessant swapping? Exactly what about the E-P3 makes it worth dumping the E-P1 at a net cost of maybe $300?

Sorry, the gremlins got at the Art Filters page and hid it away. If you have another look you should see it magically appear now (although you'll probably need to refresh your browser to get pages to load properly).

Hi, thanks for the nice review but I do not understand why it is written, that EP3 output looks week in comparison with Panasonic G3/GH2. When you compare the test results of RAW/JPG quality with Compare With... the results are the same.

I think I am going to stick with my original Pen. I don't mean the E-P1, I mean my 1966 Pen FT. Truly a wonderful camera. If the E-P3 was £300 then yes. But £699 for the body only and £799 inclusive of the kit lens then this thing too expensive. Besides, I hate using a camera at nigh arms length, so the EVF will add another £99. No thanks.

Not worth buying! The image quality is the same as before! They should have focused more on the image quality, like dynamic range and shadow detail and high iso performance, and not use a 3 year old sensor that wasn't so good in the first place! A faster autofocus is not worth the high price tag! Personally I need a pen like camera for street photography that has manual controls, no video, clean interface without scene modes and art filters! What I do need is dedicated iso and wb functions, and ETTR/Zone exposure mode! And for manual focus lenses the sony peaking mode is the best! A built in EVF would be implemented for that price tag!

Real world people taking photographs in the real world for real world print do not look at shadow detail only pixel peepers. The E-P3 has just the "right amount" of dynamic range and an increase in dynamic range will not improve your composition and is essential for a good photo taken with the E-P3 http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou/5936271252/in/photostream . The ISO performance is fine for what you will use for 99.5% of photos taken in the real world.The E-P3 has quick easy access controls for fast use and street photography.A bit rich going on about art filters when your myspace avatar is a pink and purple reverse duotone.Focus peaking is useless for street photography and no better in real world use (maybe worse) than the easy to use Olympus and Panasonic solutions.The image quality is largely now dependent on the skill of the photography and the quality of the lenses you use...

Olympus caught a lot of flack for the slowish AF in the E-P1/2 and E-PL1. Slow operational speed was another big one. And yes, IQ lag behind latest APS-C was a third, but most reviews of the earlier cameras still praised the good IQ (at least in jpeg).

You can be sure that the current generation (E-P3, E-PL3 and E-PM1) were planned a year ago, when all the talk was still about speed. That made it a logical choice for Olympus to focus on the speed and operational issues. I guess their R&D people are now working on IQ and sensor.

As to the price tag of the E-P3, there are lower priced models with the same AF improvements and operational speed (and IQ).

Real world people!? Who are they!?) Dynamic range gives me more room for ETTR. Shadow details are most important. And focus peaking is not useless for street photography! Image quality has always been dependent on the photographer! And my Avatar is not a art mode, and has no relevance regarding my pow! ISO performance for 99.5% of real world photos!?) I really don't know what that means!!))

I have to mostly agree with YouDidntDidYou though I am not sure what focus peaking means?

Pixel peaking is however an excercise in futility. For me the reason I bought the EP-3 (coming from G2) is the 12MP sensor is good enough for me, for my own pleasure or to sell (still life and landscape mostly). The sensor coupled with their quality metering and JPEG engine is probably good enough for most people but they often look at easily measurable stats rather than real life ability of the camera...

I do appreciate the AF speed and accuracy, unlike all the phase based cameras I have owned in the past (Pentax, Canon and Nikon) I don't have to calibrate faster lenses to try and get accurate (consistant) focus, to me that is major advantage of fast contrast focus as I really don't think we should have to do that..

Let's get one thing straight: image quality is a technical and not an artistic matter. It is dictated by the sensor and lens. It has NOTHING to do with the skills of the photographer. A limited dynamic range and poor high ISO performance will be there whether you are David Bailey or two left hands. DP review drew attention to the "steep tone curve" of M4/3 with the G1 and NOTHING has been done to correct it

It has nothing 2 do with pixel peeping! It has 2 do with exposure headroom! Personally I only shoot in RAW mode! And what I am talking about is the ability of the sensor to handle the dynamic range of difficult lightning situations! It is a personal view of workflow. I don't need a lot of functions, just the basic aperture, exposure, WB, ISO and histogram, and a fast way of focusing with manual lenses! I mostly work with manual lenses, like the feel of it, and its easier to pre focus or place focus where ever I think is the best and just shoot, not having to bother with focus!

Actually ChrisKramer1, the Oly cameras have had a less steep tone curve since the 620. Whether you like the results is another matter, since it can introduce more shadow noise. I do think most people are too hung up on what they call "image quality." True image quality comes from the complete package, the electronics, the lenses and how they work with the body, and how the engineers tune everything for final output. A 12 megapixel raw from the EP3 compared to the Panasonic GF1 do not look the same in the same software, even though they supposedly have the same "old" sensor.

@patoth66why do you want dedicated white balance functions when as you say "you only shoot RAW" then?I'm also pretty sure you will be pretty disappointed when you try an use focus peaking for street photography.@Chris Kramer1"It has NOTHING to do with the skills of the photographer."do you know I see as the single biggest cause of poor quality images is not holding the camera firmly enough, closely followed by not using the right camera settings and /or lens for the shot and then inability to work with available light and/or flash...The sensors on all DSLR's and Mirrorless cameras made in the last 4 years can provide the quality for 24 by 30 inch + prints, it's time to stop blaming the camera...

I use WB for comparing the scene, it gives me creative feedback to take home! And ok, drop the peaking focus! I have my eyes on the upcoming Ricoh GXR M- module! It will have some nice specs and features! When it comes to dynamic range, for me it has to do with being able to shoot the image as for to the left as possible without clipping highlights! A sensor that can handle the highlights gives me a better S/N, and by that a greater image quality! That means better headroom, better S/N ratio!!)

So basically, it is the camera that Olympus should have produced three years ago, using the sensor that it did three years ago with the image quality it gave us three years ago but with the price of the latest mid-range DSLR today. Somebody's laughing and I don't think it's the consumer...

I quite agree.The E-PL1 was a nice camera which suffered from its bad AF and high ISO IQ and had a faulty kit lens.Now we're in the third generation and Olympus still is only fixing the thing. Now consumers are axpected to pay a hefty premium for what is esentially the fixed E-PL1.Of course it still gets an award, as Mr. Butler insinuates- you can always find a reason for giving an award, it all depends on your priorities.Having said this I love the jpgs Olympus MFT produce but this is just too expensive now.

Agree, apart from (only?) 12Mp realistically there is very little difference - what, 1/2 a stop? upt o ISO 3200 - beyond which most people would not use those seetings anyway. And below those levels the JPEG IQ blows most of the competition away.

That is just a well written and unbiased review. Great job. The E-P3 is not my cup of tea but I am sure it will work for a lot of people. The good thing is that we have excellent reviews like this to help us make those decisions.

Because an Ipad it's totally a different object. I've bought an iPad because I needed an Ipad, not a laptopI don't need another DSLR , I need an EP-3-like cameraIt' s easy , we need to understand what we need....

I will wait for the E-P mini because, for me, its all about great image quality in a small size with the advantage of image stabilisation using pancake and other older lenses. If size was not an issue I would probably opt for the G3 although, i have heard from some souces, that the touch-screen response is not as good as the E-P3.

Totally agree with Federico, who buys an ipad needs it only because he thinks he is cool and to stay on Facebook 24/7 and play games, if I need to do work or study or run PS or LR I have to buy a real laptop

I have a E-PL2 too and I really don't think Oly expects many of us to upgrade. The PL2 is a great camera.

There is very little difference between the two cameras .... quicker focus and an autofocus light would be nice but not worth 900$

I do say I like the look of the P3 .... and if it had a recessed LCD (to reduce the risk of scratches) I would be more tempted, or even better a G3 articulating display.

People complain about the sensor, but the 12MP sensor in both the PL2 and P3 give really good images below 1600 and are well matched to the kit lenses. What the P3 really needed was an articulating display so you can turn it backwards in your camera bag and have more flex in shooting.

A EVF would be nice but only if the camera stayed the same size, which I think is impossible at this price point.

I notice that DPreview chose to compare the 3P to P1 and 2 in most of their comparisons, instead of the much closer PL2. Questionable judgement IMO